In the beginning, there was simply word of mouth. It was a tool with enough coherence to document an immense history, but it was also often missing details. Then came script, and from script came print. Our toolsets became more robust and with them so did our exchanges. But along the way, as our once-interpersonal conversations evolved into collective consumption, we lost our means of response.
When we do business with a corporation, the old adage “you get what you pay for” is an accurate description of our transactions with that corporation. It is very clear that for some time, Rutgers has been moving toward a corporate model at a pace that has accelerated significantly in the last five years. So, it is not surprising that our students, who are paying more and more every year for what Rutgers provides, cannot understand why they are getting less and less.
Although Rutgers international students seem omnipresent on campus, many locally attending students are completely unaware of the experiences of their international peers, or the challenges they face in obtaining an American education.
International law recognizes the right of refugees to return to their homes after displacement. Therefore, the right of return is non-negotiable for Palestinians as it is the crux of the struggle for freedom from occupation. The concept of Palestinian right of return calls for the return of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to their homeland. It serves as the bedrock of the struggle against the vicious eviction of an indigenous people from their homes.
With the Democratic primary field already consisting of 14 candidates — and more almost certain to join — it is clear that this primary race will be far different in character than the 2016 Democratic primary, which saw an anointed party favorite carry the competition from beginning to end.
As active citizens, we support causes close to our hearts and our communities. As Americans, we participate in a democratic process that we are privileged to enjoy. But, when our loyalty as Americans is called into question for supporting a strong relationship between America and Israel — a cause that is rooted in mutual values — we are alarmed. When we are gaslighted for daring to call out this reckless bullying, our community of advocates is accused of “moneyed influence.” In a recent commentary by an organization here at our University, our community of advocates was libelously accused of just that.
I grew up in a town of "haves" and "have-nots." Those with the "haves" were simply placed higher up on the trivial social ladder than the "have-nots." Even beginning in the early days of elementary school, this distinction was clear.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), in recent weeks, has been harshly criticized for tweets she made regarding how lawmakers were influenced by the pro-Israeli lobby. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) threatened punishment against Omar for criticizing Israel. Omar responded to this by tweeting a Puff Daddy lyric, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” When she was asked on Twitter who she believes is paying Americans to be pro-Israel she tweeted “AIPAC!”
The decline of ISIS brought along more security threats and international crises, both long-term, and short-term. The Caliphate was declared over after a series of prolonged losses, leading to both political and economic disasters within itself. In 2017, Iraqi forces reclaimed Mosul, the Caliphate’s most important stronghold, as the Syrian Democratic Forces took back Raqqa, another important city.
On March 5, The Daily Targum ran an op-ed titled “Solution to Poverty is in Individual Acts.” In it, author Michael Vespa suggests that poverty in America could be reduced by taxing Americans less so that they can give more to charity because the government “has had no real progress” in combating poverty. But, the article fails to recognize the nuanced nature of charitable giving in the United States, and makes false assumptions about charitable giving.
In the era of Bernie Sanders and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, there is a growing commitment for more government intervention to help the less fortunate. Programs such as food stamps, housing vouchers and a multitude of others exist solely to help the less fortunate, but there have been unsatisfactory results. The consensus in Washington is clear. More and more government programs centered on helping the less fortunate are needed.
As 2020 approaches, many different leaders and politicians are announcing their run for presidency. One of those is Howard Schultz, former CEO of Starbucks, who is running as an independent candidate.
I write to amplify your recent editorial, "Lack of faculty diversity needs mending,” which points out that faculty poorly represent the diversity of New Jersey citizens, and that Rutgers is among the worst of its peers in gender and racial diversity in its senior administration.
The year began in turmoil for the recently established Zimbabwean government, as it battles its worst economic crisis to date. The post-Mugabe era, in which President Emmerson Mnangagwa promised he would take a different economic and human rights approach, spiraled downward, with the aid of increased government debt and scarcity of foreign currency such as the U.S. dollar, which the country adopted as its national currency in 2009. This led to failure of the government to reach its national tax revenue, causing an increase in unemployment reaching approximately 90 percent. On top of that, fuel prices skyrocketed, causing public panic and backlash.
It was a graduation party, one that was beautifully decorated with lights, a fire surrounded by chairs for the guests to sit on and food, that made me realize how disconnected our generation really is from each other. There were games, music, sparklers and smores. It looked and felt perfect when I walked in.
During his campaign, President Donald J. Trump proposed to build a wall at the Mexican-American border. On Dec. 22, 2018, he shut down the government in response to the refusal for wall funds from Congress. More than a month later, he conceded to reopen the government without wall funds, making this the longest shut down in history. During the shutdown, there was considerable opposition to the wall questioning the wall’s morality, notably from Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.,12) and Pope Francis.
Over the weekend a priest at my parish, usually known for thoughtful sermons, delivered a rather polarizing talk. As someone who is wary of political discussions in church, I cringed when the priest broached the issue of building a wall along the southern border. He quoted Pope Francis's repeated calls against the wall, urged that American Catholics should stand against this rhetoric as German Catholics should have done during the Holocaust and decried it as wholly immoral.